Collective victimisation and collective guilt in the former Yugoslavia : the interplay between individual, local and societal levels

The thesis examines the impact of collective war victimization on individuals' readiness to accept or assign collective guilt for past war atrocities. As a complement to previous studies, its aim is to articulate an integrated approach to collective victimization, which distinguishes between individual-, communal-, and societal-level consequences of warfare. Building on a social representation approach, it is guided by the assumption that individuals form beliefs about a conflict through their personal experiences of victimization, communal experiences of warfare that occur in their proximal surrounding, and the mass- mediatised narratives that circulate in a society's public sphere. Four empirical studies test the hypothesis that individuals' beliefs about the conflict depend on the level and type of war experiences to which they have been exposed, that is, on informative and normative micro and macro contexts in which they are embedded. The studies have been conducted in the context of the Yugoslav wars that attended the breakup of Yugoslavia, a series of wars fought between 1991 and 2001 during which numerous war atrocities were perpetrated causing a massive victimisation of population. To examine the content and impact of war experiences at each level of analysis, the empirical studies employed various methodological strategies, from quantitative analyses of a representative public opinion survey, to qualitative analyses of media content and political speeches. Study 1 examines the impact of individual- and communal- level war experiences on individuals' acceptance and assignment of collective guilt. It further examines the impact of the type of communal level victimization: exposure to symmetric (i.e., violence that similarly affects members of different ethnic groups, including adversaries) and asymmetric violence. The main goal of Study 2 is to examine the structural and political circumstances that enhance collective guilt assignment. While the previous studies emphasize the role of past victimisation, Study 2 tests the assumption that the political demobilisation strategy employed by elites facing public discontent in the collective system-threatening circumstances can fuel out-group blame. Studies 3 and 4 have been conducted predominantly in the context of Croatia and examine rhetoric construction of the dominant politicized narrative of war in a public sphere (Study 3) and its maintenance through public delegitimization of alternative (critical) representations (Study 4). Study 4 further examines the likelihood that highly identified group members adhere to publicly delegitimized critical stances on war. - Cette thèse étudie l'impact de la victimisation collective de guerre sur la capacité des individus à accepter ou à attribuer une culpabilité collective liée à des atrocités commises en temps de guerre. En compléments aux recherches existantes, le but de ce travail est de définir une approche intégrative de la victimisation collective, qui distingue les conséquences de la guerre aux niveaux individuel, régional et sociétal. En partant de l'approche des représentations sociales, cette thèse repose sur le postulat que les individus forment des croyances sur un conflit au travers de leurs expériences personnelles de victimisation, de leurs expériences de guerre lorsque celle-ci se déroule près d'eux, ainsi qu'au travers des récits relayés par les mass media. Quatre études testent l'hypothèse que les croyances des individus dépendent des niveaux et des types d'expériences de guerre auxquels ils ont été exposés, c'est-à-dire, des contextes informatifs et normatifs, micro et macro dans lesquels ils sont insérés. Ces études ont été réalisées dans le contexte des guerres qui, entre 1991 et 2001, ont suivi la dissolution de la Yougoslavie et durant lesquelles de nombreuses atrocités de guerre ont été commises, causant une victimisation massive de la population. Afin d'étudier le contenu et l'impact des expériences de guerre sur chaque niveau d'analyse, différentes stratégies méthodologiques ont été utilisées, des analyses quantitatives sur une enquête représentative d'opinion publique aux analyses qualitatives de contenu de médias et de discours politiques. L'étude 1 étudie l'impact des expériences de guerre individuelles et régionales sur l'acceptation et l'attribution de la culpabilité collective par les individus. Elle examine aussi l'impact du type de victimisation régionale : exposition à la violence symétrique (i.e., violence qui touche les membres de différents groupes ethniques, y compris les adversaires) et asymétrique. L'étude 2 se penche sur les circonstances structurelles et politiques qui augmentent l'attribution de culpabilité collective. Alors que les recherches précédentes ont mis l'accent sur le rôle de la victimisation passée, l'étude 2 teste l'hypothèse que la stratégie de démobilisation politique utilisée par les élites pour faire face à l'insatisfaction publique peut encourager l'attribution de la culpabilité à l'exogroupe. Les études 3 et 4 étudient, principalement dans le contexte croate, la construction rhétorique du récit de guerre politisé dominant (étude 3) et son entretien à travers la délégitimation publique des représentations alternatives (critiques] (étude 4). L'étude 4 examine aussi la probabilité qu'ont les membres de groupe fortement identifiés d'adhérer à des points de vue sur la guerre critiques et publiquement délégitimés.

Victimization in Childhood of Male Sex Offenders: Relationship between Violence Experienced and Subsequent Offenses through Discourse Analysis

This study aims at better understanding how the form of childhood violence experienced and the type of offense subsequently committed affect how sex offenders recall punishments and difficult events. Fifty-four male perpetrators convicted of sexual offenses against children (SOCs) or against adults (SOAs) were interviewed in France, Belgium, and Switzerland using the Lausanne Clinical Interview (Entretien Clinique de Lausanne or LCI). Almost three-quarters of the sex offenders reported having been victimized during childhood. The correspondence analysis identified several factors that differentiated them. Their appraisal of the distressing event, method of coping with and distancing themselves from it, and how they dealt with emotions varied markedly depending on whether they recognized having experienced various forms of violence during childhood and on what type of offense they subsequently committed. Victimization can be identified as much by the events experienced as by their effect on the sex offender's discourse. Identification of these discursive indicators may lead to an improved therapeutic approach for potentially traumatic childhood experiences.

Patients' spontaneous discourse on the importance of significant others in the course of transplantation: A qualitative study

Background: This study explores significant ones' implication before and after transplantation. Methods: Longitudinal semi-structured interviews were conducted in 64 patients awaiting all-organ transplantation. Among them, 58 patients spontaneously discussed the importance of their significant other in their daily support. Discourse analysis was applied. Findings: During the pre-transplantation period renal patients reported that significant others took part in dialysis treatment and participated to regimen adherence. After transplantation, quality of life improved and the couple dynamics returned to normal. Patients awaiting lung or heart transplantation were more heavily impaired. Significant others had to take over abandoned roles. After transplantation resuming normal life became gradually possible, but after one year either transplantation health benefits relieved physical, emotional and social loads, or complications maintained the level of stress on significant others. Discussion: Patients reported that significant others had to take over various responsibilities and were concerned about long-term stress that should be adequately supported.

The category 'natural' in the discourse of couples who used medically assisted procreation

As a constantly evolving set of complex biotechnologies, medically assisted procreation (MAP) jeopardises a category that seems to be taken for granted: that of 'natural'. What is 'natural' or not when MAP is used to procreate? What are the boundaries between a 'natural' and a 'non-natural' fertilisation? Drawing upon a dialogical approach to language and cognition, our study examined the semantic field of the category 'natural' as expressed in interviews between a psychiatrist and seven couples who resorted to MAP and had to decide whether to keep their frozen pre-embryonic cells (zygotes) for further procreation or to allow them be destroyed. We examined how these couples evoked the category 'natural' and showed that in their argumentation, the category 'natural' encompassed a wide variety of phenomena, which shifted the boundaries between the 'natural' and 'non-natural'. In so doing, the couples 'renaturalised' MAP, normalized it, moved the boundaries between what is legitimate or not, and showed their accountability. Hence, reference to the category 'natural' seemed to act both as an argumentative and a psychological resource in the elaboration of the person's experience in resorting to MAP.

Collective intelligence

Estudio e implantación de algoritmos de recomendación, búsqueda, ranking y aprendizaje.